CyberLink Community Forum
where the experts meet
| Advanced Search >
Thoughts about Laptop VS Desktop for video editing
Reply to this topic
PepsiMan
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Clarksville, TN Joined: Dec 29, 2010 01:20 Messages: 1053 Offline
[Post New]
my bad. here's item no. 2.



GTX960 HEVC MKV HA 4096x2160 @37Mb/sec & screen shot of MPC-HC.



PepsiMan
[Thumb - 2015-11-01_201706.jpg]
 Filename
2015-11-01_201706.jpg
[Disk]
 Description
screenshot GTX960 HEVC MKV HA
 Filesize
885 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
55 time(s)
[Thumb - Capture_4.mp4_snapshot_03.13_[2015.11.01_20.18.36].jpg]
 Filename
Capture_4.mp4_snapshot_03.13_[2015.11.01_20.18.36].jpg
[Disk]
 Description
8. GTX960 HEVC MKV HA 4096x2160 @37Mb/sec
 Filesize
855 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
49 time(s)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Nov 01. 2015 21:26

'no bridge too far'

Yashica Electro 8 LD-6 Super 8mm
Asrock TaiChi X470, AMD R7 2700X, W7P 64, MSI GTX1060 6GB, Corsair 16GB/RAM
Dell XPS L702X i7-2860QM, W7P / W10P 64, Intel HD3000/nVidia GT 550M 1GB, Micron 16GB/RAM
Samsung Galaxy Note3/NX1
Reply
Neil.F.1955 [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Joined: Mar 07, 2012 09:15 Messages: 1303 Offline
[Post New]
Hi, all!

This argument is all "much of a muchness" to me. I don't see myself getting a laptop anytime soon, so I'm staying with my desktop(tower, screen, keyboard, scanner, printer all as discreet components, much like a 1970s stereo system! LOL).

Cheers!

Neil.
Reply
Eugen157
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Palm Springs area, So.CA Joined: Dec 10, 2012 13:57 Messages: 660 Offline
[Post New]
Thank you PepsiMan, must have taken all Sunday afternoon with switching cards and so on.

Our numbers are reasonably close, looks like we are ready for UHD BR.Interesting that the render times for 264 and 265 are identical too.

Would be interesting to see some numbers of a i5 or i7 laptop.


Might be a while before PD will add the ability to burn for that format. Hope we don't have to wait until PD15.

Most likely there will be a version that allows burning of UHD BR using our existing BR burners.

Eugene

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at Nov 01. 2015 23:37

73s, WA6JZN ex DL9GC
CYBERLINK PLEASE ADD UHD BLU RAY BURNING SOFTWARE
PD14,
Win10,64bit.CPU i7 6700,16GB ,C= 480 GB SSD ,GPU GTX1060 6GB 1 fan. Plus 3 int, 4 ext HDD's for video etc.LG WH16NS40 reads UHD.
4K 24" ViewSonic monitor.Camera Sony FDR-A
Reply
TonyL [Avatar]
Newbie Private Message Location: Nr. Coventry, UK Joined: Oct 10, 2015 04:07 Messages: 46 Offline
[Post New]
I agree with Eugene, the discussion about comparative performance deserves a new thread so I created one here http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/46135.page

I hope other agree.

TonyL Self build Xeon W3690, 12GB RAM, 850EVO SSD, Asus 2GB GTX960, Win10H 64bit, PD14
iMac 27" Retina 5K i5, 24GB RAM, Radeon M295X 4GB, Bootcamp Win10H 64bit
Reply
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 5038 Offline
[Post New]
Quote: Our numbers are reasonably close, looks like we are ready for UHD BR.Interesting that the render times for 264 and 265 are identical too.

I guess it's how one defines reasonably close.
For H.265, MKV, HEVC 4K 4096 x 2160/30p (37Mbps), PepsiMan, 3:11, Eugene, 2:02. 191sec/122sec, A 1.56 factor between two GTX960's. As I had said
Quote: From my experience what one will see is a reasonable separation of GTX960 capability, probably on the order of 50% difference or so for the exact same task on different computers.

Time difference nearly a identical ratio to VE load, 80% for Eugene, 53% for PepsiMan. 80/53=1.51. So a PC that achieves 100% VE load for this encoding task will simply be 1.25 faster than Eugene's test.

Attached is such a run, 1:41, 99%VE load.

Jeff
[Thumb - 4K_37Mbps_gtx960.png]
 Filename
4K_37Mbps_gtx960.png
[Disk]
 Description
 Filesize
640 Kbytes
 Downloaded:
42 time(s)
Reply
Eugen157
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Palm Springs area, So.CA Joined: Dec 10, 2012 13:57 Messages: 660 Offline
[Post New]
Thank you Jeff!

So you are getting a 99% VE load because your CPU is faster if I understand this correctly.

If that is so then I will leave things alone and spend the money on a new camcorder. Just kidding. Not bad for a 5 year old PC and a $200.00 upgrade, the GTX960.

From my perspective reasonable close is anything less than 5 minutes or even 10, considering that in my setup it would take 90 min with CPU only in the 4K HEVC HIPQ mode.

Eugene

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at Nov 02. 2015 18:44

73s, WA6JZN ex DL9GC
CYBERLINK PLEASE ADD UHD BLU RAY BURNING SOFTWARE
PD14,
Win10,64bit.CPU i7 6700,16GB ,C= 480 GB SSD ,GPU GTX1060 6GB 1 fan. Plus 3 int, 4 ext HDD's for video etc.LG WH16NS40 reads UHD.
4K 24" ViewSonic monitor.Camera Sony FDR-A
Reply
[Post New]
If all you do is transcoding then yes, it's OK. But if you really are doing video EDITING, then those tests are almost irrelevant.
Reply
JL_JL [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Arizona, USA Joined: Oct 01, 2006 20:01 Messages: 5038 Offline
[Post New]
Quote: If all you do is transcoding then yes, it's OK. But if you really are doing video EDITING, then those tests are almost irrelevant.

Point well taken, for me, typically 90+% of the edited video ends up being basic encoding. Not big into massive special effects that CPU govern, like color adjustments.....etc.

So yes, just a simple way to get a rough feel of capability.

Limited, yes, propose something better that the avg user on this forum could carry out.

Jeff
Reply
Eugen157
Senior Contributor Private Message Location: Palm Springs area, So.CA Joined: Dec 10, 2012 13:57 Messages: 660 Offline
[Post New]
SoNic67

What specifically do you mean by "editing", working on the time line?

Or do you refer to transitions, titles etc that are part of the video while rendering?

Jeff's test has convinced me that my computer will handle the production of UHD BR 4K HEVC material adequately, and that upgrading to a new PC would not significantly speed up that process.

That 960 is just amazing!



Eugene 73s, WA6JZN ex DL9GC
CYBERLINK PLEASE ADD UHD BLU RAY BURNING SOFTWARE
PD14,
Win10,64bit.CPU i7 6700,16GB ,C= 480 GB SSD ,GPU GTX1060 6GB 1 fan. Plus 3 int, 4 ext HDD's for video etc.LG WH16NS40 reads UHD.
4K 24" ViewSonic monitor.Camera Sony FDR-A
Reply
[Post New]
Well, true, for some the encoding process is the longest. But I assume that we all bought a NLE software do do editing - transitions, effects...
Otherwise, for just transcoding to other formats, we would only need MediaExpresso:

http://www.cyberlink.com/products/mediaespresso/features_en_US.html
Reply
Neil.F.1955 [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Joined: Mar 07, 2012 09:15 Messages: 1303 Offline
[Post New]
Hi, All!

Ummm, yes.... Didn't I get "chipped" for mentioning non-Cyberlink product by name on this website some time back? I now refer to any non-Cyberlink software as "third Party" so as not to name it by brand or name designation.

Neil.
Reply
[Post New]
MediaExpresso it is a CL product, you can see from the link.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at Nov 05. 2015 06:09

Reply
TonyL [Avatar]
Newbie Private Message Location: Nr. Coventry, UK Joined: Oct 10, 2015 04:07 Messages: 46 Offline
[Post New]
I'm not trying to open up another discussion here but I can't let Neil's last post pass without saying something.

Surely it's not disallowed to mention other products on this forum. I can't believe that. I can understand having a difference of opinion about a product but to be 'chipped' for mentioning, no, it's not on. That behaviour should be banned.

Surely everyone here has sufficient confidence in CL products not to 'chip' at people for mentioning non-CL? And even if they don't have, what's happened to free speech/expression/knowledge sharing.

I use a number of competing products, one in particular far surpasses PD14 in the creation of slideshows - Photodex Proshow, of which I have Producer. It didn't cause me not to purchase PD14 and that's because all software has strengths & weaknesses. I use the affordable software best suited to the task at hand. PD14 betters Proshow in editing video clips for example. Members of Proshow Enthusiasts forum are quite relaxed about mentioning competing products. Other forums I use are likewise.

Neil, I trust it was a misunderstanding, much the same as you not noticing CL in the link.

TonyL Self build Xeon W3690, 12GB RAM, 850EVO SSD, Asus 2GB GTX960, Win10H 64bit, PD14
iMac 27" Retina 5K i5, 24GB RAM, Radeon M295X 4GB, Bootcamp Win10H 64bit
Reply
Neil.F.1955 [Avatar]
Senior Contributor Private Message Joined: Mar 07, 2012 09:15 Messages: 1303 Offline
[Post New]
Hi, TonyL.

I'm not quite sure what to make of it, whether I was indeed "chipped" for mentioning an opposing brand of video editing software, or whether it was for something else entirely. It's too far bck for me to remember...... All I do remember is getting a PM from someone at Cyberlink saying that some of my posts have been removed. In a clear-out of a backlog of PMs, that notice was deleted as well. But, to be on the safe side, any software I use which isn't from Cyberlink, will be referred to as "Third Party Software". That way noone gets their knockles whacked with the sharp end of a feather duster! I do indeed use other software for video editing processes, because each different maker offers a style of transition effect that the other does not. So while I may use the other "third party" software for basic editing, I bring the work back to Power Director, either 8 or 14 for the "finishing touches", and to author the content to disc..

Cheers!

Neil.
Reply
Reply to this topic
Powered by JForum 2.1.8 © JForum Team